Wingless wonders

wanderlust wrote: 
I know the knives are out for Dougie and he'll never get credit for sticking to his guns but he did and it worked.

Ha ha, I said some bellend would come up with this theory.

So we go nearly two months without a win, then we get one, and all of a sudden Dougie's stubbornness has "paid off" as though the previous 9 games without a win were just a practise for the Watford game.

Here's a thought, if we'd played 4-4-2 in those 9 games we'd have a lot more points than we do.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote: 
I know the knives are out for Dougie and he'll never get credit for sticking to his guns but he did and it worked.

Ha ha, I said some bellend would come up with this theory.

So we go nearly two months without a win, then we get one, and all of a sudden Dougie's stubbornness has "paid off" as though the previous 9 games without a win were just a practise for the Watford game.

Here's a thought, if we'd played 4-4-2 in those 9 games we'd have a lot more points than we do.

Here's a thought..
If we'd played 442 with another carthorse like Cavies or Eaves alongside Juke we'd have lost by 4 or 5 every game as we'd have a useless attacking pairing and would have sacrificed a defensive mid to do it.

doffcocker wrote:It really is silly that when we win, it's because "Dougie got it tactically spot on today". And yes Hipster, it works the other way in that when we lose it's all because Dougie fucked up completely.

It's like people think there are only two combinations of decisions. One good, one bad, and when we win, it's because he went with the former.

It's alright to acknowledge that we played well, fully deserved to win, at the same time as seeing that some flaws in his thinking were still there, that might cost us a lot over x number of games.

 

Wanderlust, do you honestly think Freedman's been wanting to play two strikers for a long time, but was just intelligently waiting until he had two strikers that complimented one another?

It's a shame he hasn't been this calculating about his defensive midfielders. Everyone can see that Medo and Spearing just get in each other's way, yet they've consistently been played together.

There was an article a few months ago about how some fan had shouted something like "two strikers Dougie!" from the stands. Freedman responded by stating quite categorically that we shouldn't be playing with two strikers.

Let's be honest, people have been saying for a long time that we should be playing two up front and Dougie hasn't even entertained the idea, despite how deep we've sunk. He's finally tried it as one last throw of the dice, it's worked, and 15,000 paying customers suddenly look smarter than him. Of course he's now going to say that he wanted to play two strikers all along, but was just shrewdly waiting until the time was right.

We played 4-4-2 v Blackpool in the FA Cup and guess what the two forwards that day scored N'gog and Beckford.DF is backtracking he had Mason on loan in the past and played him in the loan striker role.Although Juke is made for Mason your not telling me that when Mason was here last that playing Mason as a lone striker was a massive mistake.In this Leauge we should be playing two up top at home every week.I think if we had a left back Ream could move in to midfield instead of Medo and Spearing could stay in his holding role and not have to get involved in attacks therefore helping the back 4 by breaking up attacks ,tackling and winning the ball back then playing the easy ball to Mavies,Danns or Ream if we had him in midfield instead of playing left back.

Beckford and Ngog kind of worked as they had a bit of pace about them. Eaves and Cavies don't. Makes sense to me.

Don't disagree about eaves and Cavies but we have had the players to play 2 up top when N'gog was here with Beckford or N'gog Mason.Be good to see Beckford n Juke play together.

wanderlust wrote:
Here's a thought..
If we'd played 442 with another carthorse like Cavies or Eaves alongside Juke we'd have lost by 4 or 5 every game as we'd have a useless attacking pairing and would have sacrificed a defensive mid to do it.

Possibly your weakest comeback ever.

You seem to be saying Dougie has been justified in his lone striker approach because we didn't have strikers good enough to play in a pair?

doffcocker wrote:Wanderlust, do you honestly think Freedman's been wanting to play two strikers for a long time, but was just intelligently waiting until he had two strikers that complimented one another?

It's a shame he hasn't been this calculating about his defensive midfielders. Everyone can see that Medo and Spearing just get in each other's way, yet they've consistently been played together.

There was an article a few months ago about how some fan had shouted something like "two strikers Dougie!" from the stands. Freedman responded by stating quite categorically that we shouldn't be playing with two strikers.

Let's be honest, people have been saying for a long time that we should be playing two up front and Dougie hasn't even entertained the idea, despite how deep we've sunk. He's finally tried it as one last throw of the dice, it's worked, and 15,000 paying customers suddenly look smarter than him. Of course he's now going to say that he wanted to play two strikers all along, but was just shrewdly waiting until the time was right.

What you're saying is just as reasonable as Dougie not fancying N'gog and Beckford together or as Lust says not a chance would I say C Davies and Eaves could be a partnership.

Is it not likely that he wanted to play 4231 as it suited the players we had best? And now that Eagles, Lee, Moritz and Mavies have all failed to perform consistently in the 3 behind a lone striker he's decided to change tact and bring in 2 strikers he thinks can do a job together?

I'd agree with you about Spearing and Medo, I've said since summer we don't need both, but it's wrong to say he's refused to play 2 up front until now. There are numerous instances, although given how poor we've been he should have been looking to change the tactics on a consistent basis a couple of months ago.

This argument White84 is putting forward that Dougie had no choice really is bollocks though, given his previous approach to new signings nobody would have been surprised to see Mason on the bench for his first game.

Agree with Nat on this one we have had enough strikers all season to play 4-4-2 although N'gog was a useless goal scorer when he played 4-4-2 with Beckford v Blackpool we won both strikers scored.DF was wrong playing Zat Knight for the first ten games earning us bottom position with 2 points.Knight was dropped and we went 8 unbeaten.Know he has realized that 4-4-2 at home is a must.As long as he learns from his mistakes he will become a better manager.

In a reply to BWFC 1874 8 matches without a win and none this year,DF fought to get Mason on loan a short loan at that.Also as his formation didn't suit the team ie no wins since Boxing Day.Either he had it in his mind to change to 4-4-2 at home as clearly 2 wins all season tells its own story and a win was needed with only Birmingham having now less wins at home than us 2.We will have to agree to disagree,everyone is entitled to his or her opinion that's why it's a forum.However DF had it in his mind to go 4-4-2 or he had no choice but to play a striker who had scored in his last two matches Juke and Mason after all the hassle he had gone to getting him in on loan.But that's my opinion and you can agree or disagree that's what it's all about varying views on our team and manager.

Everything you've posted there suggests it was a conscious effort from Dougie to bring in Mason and go 2 up top, rather than forced by circumstance in anyway.

You're right though forums are for opinions so keep posting yours, interesting reads.

At the end of the day every Bolton fan on this forum is unanimous that Zat Knight is crap and a liability on the pitch. Everyone has been saying it for years.

Dougie finally drops Knight and we stop conceding bucketloads and win the odd game. But then he brings him back and shifts our best defender to left back. We start letting in a sackful of goals again - but how many games does it take Dougie to see what is right in front of his nose? Too many is the answer.

And this is the problem with Dougie - it takes him too long to react to obvious problems. If he wasn't happy with his strikers he should have done something about it months ago, if he wasn't happy with Cavies why the fuck pay £300k for him? We've needed a left back for ages now, but he hasn't addressed the problem.

This is why he should be sacked. Unfortunately Saturday bought him another month of defeats - unless we get stuffed by Rovers.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

This is why he should be sacked. Unfortunately Saturday bought him another month of defeats - unless we get stuffed by Rovers.

And even then we'll be less than 3 months away from the end of the season. He won't be going anywhere before the Summer. However, his contract is up in the Summer. Be interested when he is planning on releasing ALL these players if the club decide to release him as well! Would make me chuckle how much of a git old Fartside is!

Dougies' contracts up in 2015, sorry Jah.

I probably have less confidence in Freedman than anyone on this site (even you Nat!!) but I think it's too late now this season to sack him. It must be clear by now that management either can't (financially) or won't sack him so we're stuck with him unless we fall into the bottom three when all bets would be off. I don't expect that to happen and with Wheater now back in defence and looking solid at last it's again got Dougie out of jail. So we are now stuck with what we have until the summer as it's unlikely we're bad enough to go down. For me the season's now over so it's what happens in the summer that counts. With so many in on loan and several to leave as contracts run out Dougievwill have a real chance of building a new team.

I don't think he's up to it, neither wise enough or clever enough in footballing terms so for me I'd bin him also if financially we can afford it. Again I don't think we will and he will be given until Christmas to see how he gets on. I think he'll fail just like Coyle and Megson but at least he couldn't complain he was given a chance. That's all of course assuming ED hasn't sold the club before then which would change everything.  

White84 wrote:Agree with Nat on this one we have had enough strikers all season to play 4-4-2 although N'gog was a useless goal scorer when he played 4-4-2 with Beckford v Blackpool we won both strikers scored.DF was wrong playing Zat Knight for the first ten games earning us bottom position with 2 points.Knight was dropped and we went 8 unbeaten.Know he has realized that 4-4-2 at home is a must.As long as he learns from his mistakes he will become a better manager.

He hasnt learnt from 12 months of mistakes so why will he change now. The defining moment for the prick came when that clown Pratley injured himself and he was forced to put Danns back in the midfield which galvanised the side. Do you honestly think he would have changed a thing until at least 70 minutes had gone or we were 1 down,not a fucking chance.

Natasha Whittam wrote:
This is why he should be sacked. Unfortunately Saturday bought him another month of defeats - unless we get stuffed by Rovers.

Exactly.

I was looking at how euphoric the fans were on Saturday, thinking how can you possibly be this happy?

I don't get how people can have so much contempt for a manager, then be that pleased to see him buy himself some job security.

I agree with a lot of comments,but if he learns from his mistakes or realizes a certain formation suits the side and changes it and we win matches,that's all I'm concerned about.Best performance this season against Watford who were unbeaten in 5.We could have won by a country mile rather than 2-0,but happy to take what will be a moral boost for Saturday against the six fingered mutants from down the inbred part at the end of the A666.Hope Wheater smashes Rhodes in to row Z in the first 5 hate Them tossers from sheep wood park.

We played very similarly against Burnley but everyone thought we were crap. So why was this one game of the season?